SAD SIGHT
Posted: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:08 am
Sad to see the old trustworthy workhorses like this and being ripped apart.
Hi there Mak
Where is this happening
Sukkelaar
Page 1 of 1
Re: SAD SIGHT
Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Re: SAD SIGHT
Posted: Fri May 01, 2009 9:44 pm
Waterkloof AFB. Transall 160's being "dismantled" by a scrap metal contractor. 
Re: SAD SIGHT
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 10:50 am
Use to jump out of them in the old days
Sukkelaar
Sukkelaar
Re: SAD SIGHT
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 10:57 am
Sad to see, but I salute the person who authorised their removal.
My one pet hate in life is all the aircraft lying around airfields in South Africa that will never fly again.
This type of clean-up is good for my style....
My one pet hate in life is all the aircraft lying around airfields in South Africa that will never fly again.
This type of clean-up is good for my style....
Re: SAD SIGHT
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 2:29 pm
So what type of aircraft is it?
Re: SAD SIGHT
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 4:01 pm
Sorry.. double post see below John!
Re: SAD SIGHT
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 4:03 pm
Looks like a Transall C-160
In 1959, Transall (Transporter Allianz) was formed to design and develop a new transport aircraft. The prototype C.160 first flew in 1963. Initial production ended in 1972. In 1976, responsibility for production of the aircraft was given to Aerospatiale in France and MBB (now DaimlerChrysler Aerospace) in Germany. Production of the aircraft from 1976 to 1985 included updated avionics, a reinforced wing housing and additional fuel tanks.....
In 1959, Transall (Transporter Allianz) was formed to design and develop a new transport aircraft. The prototype C.160 first flew in 1963. Initial production ended in 1972. In 1976, responsibility for production of the aircraft was given to Aerospatiale in France and MBB (now DaimlerChrysler Aerospace) in Germany. Production of the aircraft from 1976 to 1985 included updated avionics, a reinforced wing housing and additional fuel tanks.....
Re: SAD SIGHT
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 4:52 pm
The really heartbreaking part about this story is that the aircraft are actually considered mid-life, and it was actually a book keeping error that led to their demise. 
This was later compounded by the fact that the SAAF later found a warehouse full of spares that would have kept the aircraft flying for many more years.
The crews that flew them loved them and most found it more capable than the C130 Hercules.
Furthermore, the SAAF is now waiting for the A400M which is so delayed and plagued with problems that the SAAF will probably only receive them in 8 to 12 years time. In the meantime they have to use outside contractors due to a transport aircraft/capacity shortage. Go Figure.
This was later compounded by the fact that the SAAF later found a warehouse full of spares that would have kept the aircraft flying for many more years.The crews that flew them loved them and most found it more capable than the C130 Hercules.
Furthermore, the SAAF is now waiting for the A400M which is so delayed and plagued with problems that the SAAF will probably only receive them in 8 to 12 years time. In the meantime they have to use outside contractors due to a transport aircraft/capacity shortage. Go Figure.
Re: SAD SIGHT
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 5:09 pm
Flossy
Sukkelaar
Sukkelaar
Re: SAD SIGHT
Posted: Sat May 02, 2009 6:13 pm
windswept wrote:The really heartbreaking part about this story is that the aircraft are actually considered mid-life, and it was actually a book keeping error that led to their demise.
The crews that flew them loved them and most found it more capable than the C130 Hercules.
Furthermore, the SAAF is now waiting for the A400M which is so delayed and plagued with problems that the SAAF will probably only receive them in 8 to 12 years time. In the meantime they have to use outside contractors due to a transport aircraft/capacity shortage. Go Figure.
What happend with the spareparts? Are there still aries of this type flying?